The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
7 Points

defeater argument against this?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/4/2016 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 563 times Debate No: 92331
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




you could get a meteor in the head being outside, better live in a bunker the rest of your life..

but a meteor might be very big.. has to be a deep bunker..

i am taking the con position..


Alright against my better judgement I am accepting this debate, even though it's ridiculous and against vi_spex. Since Con has said nothing about the first round being acceptance I'll jump right into my argument. Just so you know I'm playing devil's advocate... I'm not dumb :P

Although it is quite unlikely that you will be hit on the head by a meteor, there is still a chance that you could be. After all, our instruments to find meteors are not completely infallable, so a meteor always could slip through. If a meteor does slip through and hits you on the head you're probably dead, unless it is very small and doesn't actually hit you. Meteors have hit places before and killed people, although not in direct impact, but there have been instances of direct impact with meteors, although not always lethal.[1]

Thus, since there is a chance that you could be hit by a meteor, moving into a completely meteor-safe place (like a deep bunker) reduces your chances of being hit by a meteor to zero, which means that your chances of being hit with a meteor have been decreased by a factor of infinity.

Not only that, but a bunker will protect you against many other things while still protecting you from a meteor. If a nuclear war breaks out, then you will be safe in your bunker, which should have an abundant food supply in it. You will also feel more secure if you are paranoid of government conspiracies, it doesn't matter if they are true or not because you won't be affected! And any issues you have with modern society you can ignore in a bunker because they won't affect you anymore.

I believe I have successfully shown that it is in fact a good idea to live in a bunker underground to protect yourself from meteors, and the side benefits of such that cannot be ignored. Vote Pro! Then move into an underground bunker!

Debate Round No. 1


i am con.. i am saying there is no defeater argument for it

but okay.. also, there is a possibility you will fall and snap your neck if you dont jump for me 10 times real fast, go


What? I know you are con... That's why I'm saying that you SHOULD go live in a bunker. I'm the one saying that there is a "defeater" argument against that. Also, I'm more likely to snap my neck if I jump up and down than if I sit still, because there will be more motion involved and therefore more ways that my neck could snap. I really don't see what this has to do with your original point.
Debate Round No. 2


ah, but im looking for you to argue against it.. not argue for my position

well there is no telling if you not jumping 10 times breaks my spell


Oh I thought you were taking con to the "better go live in a bunker" thing... The wording confused me. Very well.

Although your chances of getting hit by a meteorite inside a bunker are reduced by a factor of infinity, that doesn't really matter. When dealing with percentages from 0-100%, it is more important to pay attention to the difference between the two than the factor. For example, if I live in a place where the tax rate is 10%, and then the government doubles it, I am paying 20% tax on all of what I buy, or 10% more than before. However, If I live in a (terrible) place where the tax is already 20%, and the government multiplies it by 1.7, then the new tax rate is 34% (and a revolution will probably happen soon). The actual increase in tax there is 14%, even though the multiplier is smaller.

Bringing this back to the original argument, the incredibly small chance that you will be hit by a meteorite, about 0.000000625%,[1] is only reduced by 0.000000625% when you move into a bunker. That is a very small chance that you are protecting yourself from.

Moving into a bunker also introduces new dangers. If you have a heart attack, or another medical emergency that debilitates you, there would be no medical facility near you to save your life, and you can't exactly try to use defibrillators on yourself, for obvious reasons. By moving into a bunker, assuming you lived in a relatively safe country beforehand, you would actually increase your chances of death.

Also, if you move into a bunker then you cannot pursue anything that you had wanted to in life, you would be living in fear without a chance of accomplishing anything you had wished to do in your life (unless your life goal is to live in a bunker).

I am pretty sure that it's obvious at this point (and always has been) that moving into a bunker to protect yourself from meteorites would be a stupid idea. Also I don't believe that vi_spex has magic and he has no proof of it, so I don't need to worry about my neck snapping if I don't jump up and down really fast. Vote Pro!
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
well done last round
Posted by InsaneSanity 2 years ago
whoops here's my source for my last argument:
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by H501 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Con refused to capitalize, so he loses conduct and grammar. He also did not even make an argument and did not use sources.